“共债共签”原则应写入《民法典》

The Principle of “Joint Debts, Both Signatures” Should be Written into the Civil Code

夫妻共同债务判定规则是婚姻法核心内容,不能坐等司法解释去规定。民法典应明确"共债共签"原则。"因为共财所以共债"只是一种想当然,不仅在比较法上找不到先例,而且忽略了"共财"之例外的易实现性、易证明性,无视有限"共财"和无限"共债"的不对应性,罔顾加利行为与增负行为在法理上的差异性。债务数额不应作为"家庭日常生活"判定的决定性标准。要严格限定夫妻共同生产经营的范围,防止随意扩大。同时,"可能共同受益"也不等于"确定共同受益"。

How to define the joint debt of husband and wife is the core content of marriage law, and it should not wait for the specific judicial interpretation. Instead, the Civil Code should clarify the principle of "joint debts, both signatures". It is only some idea for granted that"because the husband and wife enjoy the common property, so as the debt". There are no such precedents in the comparative law, also, it ignores the easy realization and easy proof of the exception to"common property", the inconsistency between the limited"common property"and the unlimited "joint debt", the differences between behavior of increasing interests and adding burden. It follows that the amount of debt should not be used as a decisive criterion for"family daily life". Finally, it is necessary to strictly limit the scope of joint production and management of spouses to prevent arbitrary expansion. At the same time, "may benefit together"does not mean"will definitely benefit together".